'Discrimination' against female lawyers (2)

All this hullabaloo about the dress code of "lady advocates" does seem a bit discriminatory against "gentlemen lawyers". I agree that the ladies should be allowed to wear trousers, but then why shouldn't we gentlemen be allowed to wear a skirt?

Then we can remove the "lady" and "gentleman" description" and just refer to "advocates". After all, I for one, being in part of Scottish descent, might like to wear my kilt.

And while we're at it, do I understand correctly that the code only applies to the criminal courts?

Serious and respectable dress should apply in all superior courts of law - "lady advocates" have been a bit lax in this for many years. And what about shoes? I have not noticed shoes being regulated. We have shirts, ties, jackets, trousers, blouses, skirts and what else being regulated. But what about shoes and socks, for that matter? Surely we cannot have brown shoes and white socks, for example. I will not proceed to regulate the unseen underlay of course.